Kiṁ nissitā isayo manujā,
khattiyā brāhmaṇā devatānaṁ
yaññam-akappayiṁsu puthūdha BJT: puthu idha, here and below; PTS: puthu'dha; but idha in the following 2 verses. Sn; puthū, here and in the next verse, but not in the third. These lines as they stand are rhythmic prose. It is possible that the original form of the lines were in Tuṭṭhubha metre, with the reading:

−−⏑−,¦⏑⏑−(−⏑⏑−)¦−⏑−−
kaccissu Sn: kacciṁ su.06 te Bhagavā yaññapathe appamattā For this line to scan properly we need to exclude yaññapathe, maybe it was an explanatory gloss that came into the text.07

−−−⏑¦−⏑−−¦¦⏑⏑−−¦⏑⏑−− ravipulā & irregular cadence
“Āsiṁsanti ChS: Āsīsanti.09 thomayanti, ~ abhijappanti Thai places abhijappanti in brackets, presuming an original Tuṭṭhubha line (we would still need to read Āsiṁsantī & thomayantī m.c.), which may be correct, as the recitor's remarks in Siloka lines normally come after the first half of the pādayuga, not at the end of the line as here. If this is an addition though, it is very early as abhijappanti is commented on in CNidd (before juhanti, and its repetition in the next line). If it is a Siloka line there is no really convincing way to correct the cadence.10 juhanti, Puṇṇakā ti Bhagavā,

−−⏑−¦−⏑,⏑¦−⏑−−
Kāmābhijappanti paṭicca lābhaṁ

−−⏑−¦−,⏑⏑¦−⏑−−
te yājayogā bhavarāgarattā.

−⏑−⏑,¦−⏑⏑¦−⏑−− irregular opening
Nātariṁsu In this and the following line the metre is upset by the reading nātariṁsu. It could be corrected by reading -iṁsū. 1046e is repeated at 1080f.11 jātijaran-ti brūmi.”

72 (1047) 3-5

−−−¦⏑−⏑,¦−⏑−− irregular
“Te ce nātariṁsu yājayogā icc-āyasmā Puṇṇako,

−−⏑−¦−⏑,⏑¦−⏑−⏑− Jagatī
yaññehi jātiñ-ca jarañ-ca mārisa,

⏑⏑−−¦⏑,−⏑⏑¦−⏑−− Extended Tuṭṭhubha
atha ko carahi We need to read atho to correct the metre, we would then have the Vedic opening; cf 1081f.12 devamanussaloke